Sometimes it helps to look things up. Sections 7.17 and 7.18 of The Chicago Manual of Style will make my typing life a little simpler:

[The Chicago Manual of Style, 16th ed. (2010).]
In 7.19 and 7.20, Chicago allows exceptions for nouns that are plural in form but singular in meaning (such as politics and the United States) and for “a few for . . . sake expressions used with a singular noun that ends in an s end in an apostrophe alone, omitting the additional s” (for goodness’ sake, for righteousness’ sake). But for all other singular words and names: ’s.
And now I’m trying to remember who it was who proclaimed, not long ago, that nobody writes “Charles’s friend.” Anyone know? The context was most likely a Strunk-and-White bashing, as Charles’s friend is the first example illustrating the first rule of usage in The Elements of Style.
[That first rule: “Form the possessive singular of nouns by adding ’s.” The Elements of Style also recommends the apostrophe-only for names from antiquity. Garner’s Modern American Usage (2009) retains that distinction: “Biblical and Classical names that end with a /zǝs/ or /eez/ sound take only the apostrophe.” I wonder whether Bryan Garner (who wrote the Chicago chapter on grammar and usage) will follow Chicago in any later GMAU.]
Friday, June 7, 2013
Chicago possessives
By
Michael Leddy
at
10:50 AM
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)

Thanks for the source, Michael. I was never to sure of myself on that point.
ReplyDeleteIncidentally, I often have problems in proving that I'm not a robot...!
You’re welcome, Barnaby. You might want to keep a Chicago Manual on your person with which to meet any challenges.
ReplyDeleteI thought the CAPTCHAs were getting easier to read. Maybe yours was an outlier.
What, all 1046 pages of it! I would have to choose between grammatical precision and sartorial elegance.
ReplyDelete